EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXVII - Page 26
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
JacobStrangelove
Australia1572 Posts
| ||
|
JacobStrangelove
Australia1572 Posts
| ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On September 20 2012 13:24 JacobStrangelove wrote: Wait what! What on earth happened? We lynch drazak? What happened to the killing scum read? After posting this near lynch deadline On September 20 2012 06:29 JacobStrangelove wrote:killing I don't think is as scum as anyother lurker.(infact slightly less) On September 20 2012 13:24 JacobStrangelove wrote: We voted for someone who our other two scum reads (assuming sharrent spoke for cubu) told us to vote for.... Sharrent was also willing to vote for killing | ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 13:54 thrawn2112 wrote: After posting this near lynch deadline Sharrent was also willing to vote for killing[/QUOTE] Almost made that same post, but I felt my Captain Hindsight reference was getting old. | ||
|
JacobStrangelove
Australia1572 Posts
On September 20 2012 13:54 thrawn2112 wrote: After posting this near lynch deadline Yeah but drazak seemed more town than killing, when I was refering to the killing being less that the lukers I was talking about stutters/cubu the two main lurkers under fire at the time. On September 20 2012 13:54 thrawn2112 wrote: Sharrent was also willing to vote for killing Yeah? I thought that was my point. I might have missed something though. | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On September 20 2012 14:04 JacobStrangelove wrote: Yeah but drazak seemed more town than killing, when I was refering to the killing being less that the lukers I was talking about stutters/cubu the two main lurkers under fire at the time. Yeah? I thought that was my point. I might have missed something though. Your post indicated you wanted us to have lynched killing instead of drazak and that it was bad we lynched drazak because sharrent was on board with it,,, I was just pointing out that sharrent was also on board with voting killing. Speaking of sharrent you mention him as a scum read, is that your read on him? | ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 14:04 JacobStrangelove wrote: Yeah but drazak seemed more town than killing, when I was refering to the killing being less that the lukers I was talking about stutters/cubu the two main lurkers under fire at the time. Really? On September 20 2012 06:15 JacobStrangelove wrote: Switching over to killing case I can see how he fits lurker scum but also I don’t think he is more scum than stutters or drazak. | ||
|
JacobStrangelove
Australia1572 Posts
Oh I see what happened... While reading the thread I switched my thoughts of who I thought was scum, but obviously never mentioned it as this was my first post back. Also yeah that is my read on sharrent. I still need to proccess the fact that he called out who he says is his mason partner. but you have to realise cubu isn't in the thread to verify this. He could have been betting on cubu being mod killed to avoid retrubution or he could have simply called it out to trade one mafia for town instead of one mafia for nobody. | ||
|
Atreides-
United States103 Posts
There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak. The consensus was "eh, he's kinda scummy, and kinda lurking, and he's kinda the best option, let's kill him and see what happens". The problem with choosing between killer and drazak is that, like I meant earlier, mafia has a lot of power here. If killer turns out to be mafia, his team can go for a drazak vote and the bandwagon easily follows because nobody has strong feelings one way or the other. The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this. So yeah, as a principle I'd support no-lynching (on day one only) versus doing a half-assed lynch on someone else. I'm mostly waiting for Cubu / his replacement to comment about the mason thing, as that's the key factor to Sharrant's innocence. When he made the claim he had no idea whether or not Cubu would end up posting and voting, which makes lying an amazingly ballsy play. Will be around again tomorrow afternoon. | ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 15:05 JacobStrangelove wrote: Also yeah that is my read on sharrent. I still need to proccess the fact that he called out who he says is his mason partner. but you have to realise cubu isn't in the thread to verify this. He could have been betting on cubu being mod killed to avoid retrubution or he could have simply called it out to trade one mafia for town instead of one mafia for nobody. No. On September 20 2012 04:48 kushm4sta wrote: if someone makes 2 posts but doesn't vote do they get modkilled? On September 20 2012 04:59 marvellosity wrote: I'd either give a warning or start looking for a replacement, depending on how I look at it. I will make a detailed post on the mason claim once Sharrant responds. I have it typed out already, but I don't want to comment on it. | ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
|
JacobStrangelove
Australia1572 Posts
| ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 15:10 Atreides- wrote: I didn't actually know about the no-lynch until the mod posted about it. If I had, I would've suggested it quite a while ago. I'm assuming that voting for a no-lynch works the same way as voting for a lynch, in that we just need a majority of votes (and not every vote like you said). Maybe I'm wrong on this. There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak. The consensus was "eh, he's kinda scummy, and kinda lurking, and he's kinda the best option, let's kill him and see what happens". The problem with choosing between killer and drazak is that, like I meant earlier, mafia has a lot of power here. If killer turns out to be mafia, his team can go for a drazak vote and the bandwagon easily follows because nobody has strong feelings one way or the other. The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this. So yeah, as a principle I'd support no-lynching (on day one only) versus doing a half-assed lynch on someone else. I'm mostly waiting for Cubu / his replacement to comment about the mason thing, as that's the key factor to Sharrant's innocence. When he made the claim he had no idea whether or not Cubu would end up posting and voting, which makes lying an amazingly ballsy play. Will be around again tomorrow afternoon. So you're seriously entering the thread starting to discuss lurker policy 30 hours into the game? After having made no productive contributions at all? | ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
|
Atreides-
United States103 Posts
In response to this: On September 20 2012 12:40 debears wrote: Why would you want a no lynch? Even though the mason claim caused confusion, there were two reasonable candidates in drazak and KillingTime who had been lurking with scummy tells. All a no lynch would have done is keep lurkers around. | ||
|
Cubu
1171 Posts
| ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 15:39 Cubu wrote: Guys im sorry but i don't think i can play. My assignment is taking way way longer than i would expect. Are you mason? | ||
|
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
Brilliant, don't bother quoting the post from a different page that you're responding to. You were saying that you supported a lynch of a lurker (Cubu in specific), yet when a lynch of a lurker happens you're saying "it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand in it". What's your reasoning behind that? | ||
|
debears
United States2516 Posts
Atreides- United States. September 20 2012 15:10. Posts 71 PM Profile Quote # filter I didn't actually know about the no-lynch until the mod posted about it. If I had, I would've suggested it quite a while ago. I'm assuming that voting for a no-lynch works the same way as voting for a lynch, in that we just need a majority of votes (and not every vote like you said). Maybe I'm wrong on this. There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak. The consensus was "eh, he's kinda scummy, and kinda lurking, and he's kinda the best option, let's kill him and see what happens". So yeah, as a principle I'd support no-lynching (on day one only) versus doing a half-assed lynch on someone else. Where do you get that this was the consensus. There is a reason why they showed up as targets. Although they posted, their posts did not contain much. They voted for other players without stating their own reasons. One thing has just now came to my mind. The instant bandwagon against him is pretty interesting, and it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand in it. Is that why you wanted a no lynch? The problem with choosing between killer and drazak is that, like I meant earlier, mafia has a lot of power here. If killer turns out to be mafia, his team can go for a drazak vote and the bandwagon easily follows because nobody has strong feelings one way or the other. The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this. The problem with this logic is that you could have said the same for drazak if you don't look at the situation with hindsight. Drazak and Killing did similar things. In fact, any lynching can be due to mafia. Who do you feel is the most mafia right now? Also, mafia can essentially bandwagon on a no lynch also. A no lynch makes it alright for everyone to prevent taking sides on arguments "because no one has strong feelings one way or another". The mafia can hide behind it. | ||
|
KillingTime
France101 Posts
Is it allowed to ask Sharrant to post a link to the mason quicktopic to prove his claim? I am asking the mods first because I feel like it might not be, but it wasn't clear in the rules (it says you can post your role pm and the sample role pm makes no mention of not being able to post the quicktopic link to the thread if you choose) | ||
| ||
